Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:15 pm +0000
Posts: 232
|
My query of Larry, is only as to his summation that a contributor to this forum is participating in "channeling" or stating an opinion, worded in such a way as to be insightful, or prophetic. Where, if the contribution is prophetic, than it cannot be justified without the passing of time.
However, if one were "channeling" a message, "from mortal to mortal", they would not be in "(2) the practice of professedly entering a meditative or trancelike state in order to convey messages from a spiritual guide." Where the "channeling" implied as to the unconfirmed authorship of the Urantia Book, was not established as the function of a persons Thought Adjuster, which has not been established in the UB as a dominance of the personality until "spiritual fusion", which may take on the form of performing "God's will", therefore if the later was a fact, and true, who would contradict "God's will" but, as is with the Biblical Prophets, shunned by those, who are of a different opinion.
As mentioned in my previous post, my question is with Larry's assertion that the contributors presentation was by "channeling", where as I quote: "You are posting channeled material as if it were fact." Thereby, my query is with his implication as to his knowledge and or certification by which he makes this statement? If he (Larry), is merely assessing his opinion, based on the content or grammatically construct of the contributor's presentation then it should have been preceded by questions as to its origination, if not publicly or via PM message.
Also, the so called "teachings" of the UB, would or could be interpreted as there being a "channel" by which "epochal, delivered by non-mortals to ALL mortals" is possible, however, this would be by presumption that the Urantia Book, is a Holy document, with only one function.
Quote: (88.4) 7:6.6 The Father, Son, and Spirit also unite to personalize the versatile Trinity Teacher Sons, who range the grand universe as the supernal teachers of all personalities, human and divine. And there are numerous other orders of Paradise sonship that have not been brought to the attention of Urantia mortals.
(88.5) 7:6.7 Between the Original Mother Son and these hosts of Paradise Sons scattered throughout all creation, there is a direct and exclusive channel of communication, a channel whose function is inherent in the quality of spiritual kinship which unites them in bonds of near-absolute spiritual association. This intersonship circuit is entirely different from the universal circuit of spirit gravity, which also centers in the person of the Second Source and Center. All Sons of God who take origin in the persons of the Paradise Deities are in direct and constant communication with the Eternal Mother Son. And such communication is instantaneous; it is independent of time though sometimes conditioned by space.
Therefore, if the UB teaches that we are all son's of the Father, then it is possible that another's insight may be the "will of the Father", but to say that whatever anyone has to say about any subject, should be considered, but not necessarily accepted as fact nor neurosis.
If one disagrees with a presentation, it should be questioned, or ignored as misguided opinion. But to make an accusation of fact without question or credential as to the knowledge of the subconscious other than what is presented in the UB, is somewhat practicing without a Medical license.
It is well known that the issue of the word "channeling" goes back to the litigation over the copy-write of the Urantia Book, where reading the summary of the transcripts makes it obvious that there are issues with any presentation of the Urantia Book having been "channeled", where Book four was not, but still that factor should be respected on this Forum, for those specific reasons. However, to make an implication that someone is "channeling" information, by any person who is associated with as "admin" of a group, would constitute a tool for control of information which might go against personal opinion and not that of the group, especially if any group solicits found[s] for its support, notwithstanding this group.
Nevertheless, I do not admonish Larry, only question the reasoning by which the authority is being used, based on this specific subject where it would seem that governance has been submitted into this subject, where other subjects have received a variance based on rebuttal.
Last edited by Caligastia on Mon Apr 20, 2015 3:43 pm +0000, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
